Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iamsnag12

Iamsnag12

Iamsnag12 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iamsnag12/Archive.

07 April 2024

– This SPI case is open.

Suspected sockpuppets

• Summerallergies (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • SPI Tools

Behaviorally very similar to past socks. This editor is adding blandly promotional filler to Scientology articles. The formatting of these additions and their references is the same. As with previous socks, there is a heavy reliance on cherry-picking from religious studies academics who are described as "scholars" to pad-out already bloated articles. James R. Lewis (scholar) in particular remains a favorite source for quote-mining.

This account begin editing in 2022 with an unflattering edit to Paul Haggis, who is an opponent of Scientology. The account's second edit was to downplay the potential role of Scientology in the disappearance of Yolanda Klug

Compare "According to Bryan Wilson..." (referring to Bryan R. Wilson, who died decades ago but was being cited in the present tense)[1]

and "According to James R. Lewis..." [2]

and "Scholar James Lewis explored the debate of the religious status of Scientology ..." [3]

to According to James R. Lewis... [4] from a past sock

and "According to Donald A. Westbrook..."[5] from another past sock

And so on, and so on, and so on.

As with previous socks (and other pro-Scientology sock farms) these edits appear superficially fine, but provide very little subjective information beyond making Scientology seem more 'scholarly'.

As this SPI was last active in 2019, I'm guessing there are other examples of pro-Scientology since then. Grayfell (talk) 22:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

---